The facts of the case

Amin Mia vs Md Nazir Ahmed case is related to Criminal Breach of Trust. Here, the accused, Md Nazir Ahmed, used to live in the informant’s house as a tenant. The accused, along with his wife, Mrs. Tahmina Akhter, requested the informant to give money for the business of importing powder milk, but the informant did not agree to pay the money.

Subsequently, the accused, along with his wife, created a cordial relationship with the family members of the informant and addressed the informant as Khaluzan. Being pleased with the behavior of the accused and his wife, the informant agreed to help the accused’s business, and accordingly, the informant gave cheques of 3800000 to the accused on different dates.

The accused, Md Nazir Ahmed, accepted the cheques by signing the counterfoils and subsequently encashed them by signing on the back of the cheques. The informant told the accused to return the money, but he delayed on various pretexts, and ultimately, the accused fled from the informant’s house.

Issue of the case

Whether Md. Nazir Ahmed can be held liable for a criminal Breach of Trust under Section 405 and be punishable under Section 406 of the Penal Code? Can Amin Mia (Informant) claim his money?

Decision

The decision favors Md Nazir Ahmed and Others.

Justification

The High Court Division, after hearing the parties, made the Rule absolute, and the impugned judgment of the appellate Court was set aside. The appellant, petitioner Nazir Ahmed, was acquitted.

The informant claimed that he gave cheques worth Tk. 380,000 to the accused petitioner, Nazir Ahmed, for business purposes. However, there was no written agreement or document to substantiate the contention based on the evidence. The High Court Division held that counterfoils cannot be legal evidence unless the original cheques are proved to have been encashed by the accused-petitioner. Accordingly, the High Court Division held that the prosecution could not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.